WikiLeaks Founder Julian Assange Can Be Extradited to Sweden, Judge Rules

LONDON -- In a swift and stunning rebuke, a British court has ruled that WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange must return to Sweden to face questioning on sexual assault charges. He has seven days to appeal the ruling; otherwise he must leave the U.K. within 10 days.

Assange has been fighting extradition since he was taken into custody and later placed on house arrest in December. He has consistently denied the allegations made by two women in August 2010.

Assange also fears eventual extradition to the U.S., where he could face espionage charges related to WikiLeaks' release of thousands of confidential U.S. military and diplomatic documents.

New terms of Assange's bail will be determined later Thursday.

Things weren't looking good for him going into the Thursday's hearing. Earlier in the week, a prominent expert on extradition law in the U.K. declared that, based on his reading of the case, it was "very likely" that Assange would be ordered by District Judge Howard Riddle to return to Sweden to face the assault charges.

And today in court, that proved to be true. In point after point, the judge systematically dismissed all of the defenses' key arguments for why Assange shouldn't have to leave the country.

Specifically, Riddle rejected the argument that Assange would not receive a fair trial in Sweden. While acknowledging that there had been "considerable adverse publicity against Mr. Assange in Sweden," including from the prime minister, he felt that any irregularities that may have occurred in Sweden would best be addressed there.

Riddle also countered the claim that the European arrest warrant issued by Sweden was invalid because Assange had not been charged with any offense (he is wanted only for questioning). He also rejected the idea that the alleged assaults were not legitimate extraditable offenses because they did not amount to "rape" outside of Sweden. To the contrary, the judge affirmed, they would count as rape here too.

But the key point centered on whether Assange had made himself available for questioning by the Swedish prosecutor back in the late summer and early fall, when the charges first surfaced. In a blunt reprimand, Riddle accused Assange's lawyer of a "deliberate attempt to mislead the court" in saying that the Swedish prosecutor had not attempted to interview his client before he left that country.

Meanwhile, Assange's online supporters -- in anticipation of this outcome -- have already begun mobilizing against the British government. This month Anonymous, the "hacktivist" collective behind pro-WikiLeaks cyber protests, called on supporters to flood British government websites with distributed denial of service (DDoS) attacks, intended to shut down a website by flooding it with requests for information.

The Australian ambassador to Sweden has also written to Britain's justice minister seeking assurances that Assange, who is an Australian citizen, be treated justly under Swedish and international law, should he be extradited there. Human rights campaigners have raised concerns about the application of European arrest warrants, arguing that they are sometimes applied before a case is ready to prosecute.

Assange has vowed to appeal the district court ruling, which he claims is politically motivated by his WikiLeaks work. If the appeal is granted, this case could conceivably drag on into the summer.

Otherwise, Assange will be sent to Sweden in early March.

Follow Delia on Twitter.